A U.K. researcher will now become the first to alter the genes in a human embryo, using the precise, but still controversial gene-editing technology called CRISPR.

Developmental biologist, Dr. Kathy Niakan, of the Francis Crick Institute, has been approved by the U.K.’s Human Fertilization and Embryo Authority (HFEA) to renew her laboratory’s research license to include gene editing of embryos.

The aim of the research, led by Dr. Niakan, is to better understand the genes human embryos needed to develop successfully within the womb. The research will include looking at the first seven days of a fertilised egg from a single cell to around 250 cells.

“I am delighted that the HFEA has approved Dr. Niakan’s application. Dr. Niakan’s proposed research is important for understanding how a healthy human embryo develops, and will enhance our understanding of IVF success rates, by looking at the very earliest stage of human development — one to seven days.”

“No research using gene editing may take place until the research has received research ethics approval. As with all embryos used in research, it is illegal to transfer them to a woman for treatment.”

Within the HFEA minutes and inspection report, it states that: “The proposed use of CRISPR/Cas9 was considered by the Committee to offer better potential for success, and was a justified technical approach to obtaining research data about gene function from the embryos used.”

The researchers believe armed with the knowledge acquired from this research, scientists may be able to “improve embryo development after in vitro fertilisation (IVF),” and “provide better clinical treatments for infertility, using conventional medical methods.”

“I promise you she has no intention of the embryos ever being put back into a woman for development.

“That wouldn’t be the point. The point is to understand things about basic human biology. We know lots about how the early mouse embryo develops in terms of how various cell lineages give rise to the embryo or to [other] tissue that make up the placenta. But we know very little about how this happens in the human embryo.”

Expert’s reaction

Upon hearing about the announcement, some experts were quick to weigh in. Here is what some of them had to say:

Prof. Darren Griffin, Professor of Genetics, University of Kent, said:

“The ruling by the HFEA is a triumph for common sense. While it is certain that the prospect of gene editing in human embryos raised a series of ethical issues and challenges, the problem has been dealt with in a balanced manner. It is clear that the potential benefits of the work proposed far outweigh the foreseen risks.

“It is a clear example how the U.K. leads the world not only in the science behind research into early human development, but also the social science used to regulate and monitor it.”

Ms. Sarah Norcross, Director of Progress Educational Trust, said:

“This decision by the HFEA is a victory for level-headed regulation over moral panic. The decision allows basic scientific research into early embryo development and miscarriage to continue, using embryos donated for research by couples who have had fertility treatment in a well-regulated environment.”

CRISPR

CRISPR is an acronym for Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeat. Its name refers to the unique organization of short, partially palindromic repeated DNA sequences found in the genomes of bacteria and other microorganisms.

CRISPR has given an unparalleled level of control over the human genome. The technique is like a biological word-processing program allowing scientists to precisely snip out and replace genes (cut and paste).

Using CRISPR the researchers plan to “cut and paste” the germline cells in an embryo, which would in affect pass on the changes to the next generation.

The ethics of editing embryonic genomes

The debate about the ethics of editing embryonic genomes has raged for several years now, and doesn’t look like it’s going away anytime soon. It has been less than a year since Chinese scientists caused an international uproar by announcing that they had genetically modified human embryos.

The results were less than disappointing, with some scientists saying that the embryos they used were abnormal, which were not the ideal test for CRISPR. However, their recent experiments to attempt to edit human genes have raised important questions about the potential risks and ethical concerns of altering the human germline.

A group of geneticists wrote in a commentary published in Nature: “Editing human embryos is problematic because it could have long-term, unintended effects.”

David King, director of the U.K. campaign group Human Genetics Alert, has called Niakan’s plans “the first step on a path… toward the legalization of GM babies,” according to Reuters.

Popular in Humans

Popular in Humans

Top Authors in Humans

Bound by a common conviction, the fates of a woman living in Beijing and a man living in New York become inextricably linked in a story of courage and freedom.

From the award-winning director of “Tibet: Beyond Fear”, Free China: The Courage to Believe, examines the widespread human rights violations in China through the remarkable and uplifting stories of Jennifer Zeng, a mother and former Communist Party member, and Dr. Charles Lee, a Chinese American businessman, who along with hundreds of thousands of peaceful citizens are imprisoned, tortured and even killed for their organs.

This timely documentary highlights the issue of unfair trade practices with the West and how Internet technologies and the re-emergence of traditional Chinese culture and spirituality are helping bring freedom to 1.3 billion people in China.

Top Authors in Humans

About Vision Times

Vision Times tells the world everything about China in today's context. We keep a close eye on China because of its influence now and the lessons we can learn from its ancient past to better our lives today.